Anyone with enough money to build a private, self-contained floating city has enough money to not worry about the cost of securing it against most any attack short of that launched by a national military force.
It seems the largest part of the communication problem when talking about libertarian ideas is the misconception that "libertarian" means "no government." There are those who attach themselves to libertarian causes who would like to see "no government," but a libertarian government would exist with the mandate to protect people from exactly the sorts of things you just questioned.
Being against the initiation of force is not, in any way, the same as being against all uses of force at all times.
9th & 10th Amendments. Unless it's a power granted to the Federal Government, or reserved by a State, it's a right retained by the people.
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has ruled that even the most tenuous, indirect link to interstate commerce creates Federal jurisdiction, which means only those rights specifically enumerated are actually protected in their eyes.
You are obviously a part of Satan's cabal, attempting to spread his grip to God-fearing communities through the insanity-inducing devil-weed known as marajawana...
It wouldn't be if "virtual" and "trash free" were both meant to describe the setup independently of each other. Since "virtually" actually describes "trash free," the usage is correct. If you're going to be a pedant, at least be a correct pedant.
Once they invest in a type of generation facility, they have a vested interest in protecting the fuel source for that generation facility. Sure, a power company may not care which generation source is cheapest when they start building, but once they've built they care very much about maintaining their profit margins.
You're not going to win a high-speed chase driving an MRAP. As officers don't receive training in how to properly operate them, they're actually more likely to injure themselves by rolling one over than to ever have a legitimate law enforcement use for one.
MRAPs are expensive, they chew up roads, and they roll over at the drop of a hat. They are useful for one thing: protecting the occupants from explosive devices.
I actually have never heard of a case of someone throwing pipe bombs at police in pursuit. I would be quite interested in reading more about the incident.
Pretty much the only case one would have been useful was the LA bank robbery. That single incident, never repeated, has been used to justify some of the most breathtaking overreach by law enforcement ever documented.
No shit. The pictures from Ferguson make anyone with the slightest modicum of weapons training cringe. A cop pointing a firearm anywhere other than at the ground unless actually making a high-risk search or arrest (or at the range, or other such circumstances for the pedant mouth-breathers) should be grounds for immediate dismissal, along with a lifetime ban from law enforcement employment.
The "Us vs. Them" mentality is certainly going to make policing less safe as they start crossing lines with the wrong people. Riots like Ferguson are the perfect cover to start taking long-range shots with very high caliber weapons at police, with zero fear of being discovered. Places that focus on community policing rarely have to worry about police being targeted. Why? Because they act like decent human beings, and there isn't a culture of egotistical men-children who think stroking automatic weapons purchased with money they stole from someone using civil asset forfeiture makes them God's gift to whoever the fuck they think they should be God's gift to.
The number of cops killed in the line of duty is a rounding error when it comes to dangerous professions. They're not heroes. They don't "deserve" special status. They joined up, they agreed to the pay and the risk. People dislike the police because the police clearly believe they are above the law. The explosion of personal video recording devices is just now making it clear how out-of-control they are.
Indeed. People also seem to gloss over the fact that the statement "the right of the people" is an absolute, independent clause. It stands on its own, regardless of any prefatory or explanatory clauses that might depend on it. All other independent clauses relating to grants of power to the government have been read and ruled that way. They are not subsumed or limited by any prefatory statement regarding the reason for their inclusion. If the 2nd Amendment is to be so limited, then so should every power in the Articles where a prefatory statement or dependent clause is attached.
Also, "the right of the people" should be read the same way in every other Amendment. If that happened, peoples' heads would explode.
Being allowed to put that default functionality into an appliance is not within the purview of the programmers. That would absolutely have to be okayed by people higher on the food chain. Most companies won't do things like that because it increases support calls by users who want to just plug something into the wall and have it work.
Cue all of the "Oh noes! Can't blame the victim!" Yes, you can. Stupid behavior with perfectly predictable negative results should, indeed, be blamed squarely on the victim. Fuck people who say it shouldn't.
I agree, though I wanted to point out that early highrise steel workers rarely used safety lines. It's one of the reasons that construction firms went out of their way to hire Mohegans, as for some reason they didn't get the vertigo that's common amongst most of the rest of the human race. Actually, they still fill the ranks of steelworkers to this day.
Actually, a significant part of the discussion is about how this has nothing to even do with space travel, and is completely inapplicable to anything having to do with orbital flight.
Slashdot Mirror
Anyone with enough money to build a private, self-contained floating city has enough money to not worry about the cost of securing it against most any attack short of that launched by a national military force.
It seems the largest part of the communication problem when talking about libertarian ideas is the misconception that "libertarian" means "no government." There are those who attach themselves to libertarian causes who would like to see "no government," but a libertarian government would exist with the mandate to protect people from exactly the sorts of things you just questioned.
Being against the initiation of force is not, in any way, the same as being against all uses of force at all times.
That's also the description of every other system of government once put into practice.
9th & 10th Amendments. Unless it's a power granted to the Federal Government, or reserved by a State, it's a right retained by the people.
Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has ruled that even the most tenuous, indirect link to interstate commerce creates Federal jurisdiction, which means only those rights specifically enumerated are actually protected in their eyes.
You are obviously a part of Satan's cabal, attempting to spread his grip to God-fearing communities through the insanity-inducing devil-weed known as marajawana...
It wouldn't be if "virtual" and "trash free" were both meant to describe the setup independently of each other. Since "virtually" actually describes "trash free," the usage is correct. If you're going to be a pedant, at least be a correct pedant.
They could let those Ay-rab beans in? We need comprehensive K-cup reform or the terrorist coffee farmers will win!
Once they invest in a type of generation facility, they have a vested interest in protecting the fuel source for that generation facility. Sure, a power company may not care which generation source is cheapest when they start building, but once they've built they care very much about maintaining their profit margins.
Cross country in an MRAP? That's an amusing mental image.
You're not going to win a high-speed chase driving an MRAP. As officers don't receive training in how to properly operate them, they're actually more likely to injure themselves by rolling one over than to ever have a legitimate law enforcement use for one.
MRAPs are expensive, they chew up roads, and they roll over at the drop of a hat. They are useful for one thing: protecting the occupants from explosive devices.
I actually have never heard of a case of someone throwing pipe bombs at police in pursuit. I would be quite interested in reading more about the incident.
Pretty much the only case one would have been useful was the LA bank robbery. That single incident, never repeated, has been used to justify some of the most breathtaking overreach by law enforcement ever documented.
I didn't look closely at the data so all of them could be wrong, but a number of posts here reference the transfer of M60s, which are machine guns.
No shit. The pictures from Ferguson make anyone with the slightest modicum of weapons training cringe. A cop pointing a firearm anywhere other than at the ground unless actually making a high-risk search or arrest (or at the range, or other such circumstances for the pedant mouth-breathers) should be grounds for immediate dismissal, along with a lifetime ban from law enforcement employment.
The "Us vs. Them" mentality is certainly going to make policing less safe as they start crossing lines with the wrong people. Riots like Ferguson are the perfect cover to start taking long-range shots with very high caliber weapons at police, with zero fear of being discovered. Places that focus on community policing rarely have to worry about police being targeted. Why? Because they act like decent human beings, and there isn't a culture of egotistical men-children who think stroking automatic weapons purchased with money they stole from someone using civil asset forfeiture makes them God's gift to whoever the fuck they think they should be God's gift to.
The number of cops killed in the line of duty is a rounding error when it comes to dangerous professions. They're not heroes. They don't "deserve" special status. They joined up, they agreed to the pay and the risk. People dislike the police because the police clearly believe they are above the law. The explosion of personal video recording devices is just now making it clear how out-of-control they are.
Indeed. People also seem to gloss over the fact that the statement "the right of the people" is an absolute, independent clause. It stands on its own, regardless of any prefatory or explanatory clauses that might depend on it. All other independent clauses relating to grants of power to the government have been read and ruled that way. They are not subsumed or limited by any prefatory statement regarding the reason for their inclusion. If the 2nd Amendment is to be so limited, then so should every power in the Articles where a prefatory statement or dependent clause is attached.
Also, "the right of the people" should be read the same way in every other Amendment. If that happened, peoples' heads would explode.
More like management not speccing it, or allowing it if it's brought up.
Being allowed to put that default functionality into an appliance is not within the purview of the programmers. That would absolutely have to be okayed by people higher on the food chain. Most companies won't do things like that because it increases support calls by users who want to just plug something into the wall and have it work.
There have been a number of leaks of classified documents because of stupid behavior by people who should know better.
In many cases, it is absolutely the best way to get stupid behavior stopped.
Cue all of the "Oh noes! Can't blame the victim!" Yes, you can. Stupid behavior with perfectly predictable negative results should, indeed, be blamed squarely on the victim. Fuck people who say it shouldn't.
ICMP messages are routinely filtered out by routers.
It means that targeted malware can be controlled without any telltale backdoor data transmissions.
No, not a problem in general, but not all malware infections are of the long-distance, anonymous hacker sort.
I agree, though I wanted to point out that early highrise steel workers rarely used safety lines. It's one of the reasons that construction firms went out of their way to hire Mohegans, as for some reason they didn't get the vertigo that's common amongst most of the rest of the human race. Actually, they still fill the ranks of steelworkers to this day.
Actually, a significant part of the discussion is about how this has nothing to even do with space travel, and is completely inapplicable to anything having to do with orbital flight.
The point was pointless whining, I'm pretty sure. Moving the goalposts is par for the course.